Supreme Court says Arizona cannot demand proof of citizenship for federal voter registration

  • Article by: JESSE J. HOLLAND , Associated Press
  • Updated: June 17, 2013 - 10:24 PM

WASHINGTON — States can't demand proof of citizenship from people registering to vote in federal elections unless they get federal or court approval to do so, the Supreme Court ruled Monday in a decision complicating efforts in Arizona and other states to bar voting by people who are in the country illegally.

  • 92
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
EleanoreJun. 17, 13 9:55 AM

This sure looks wrong on the surface. I don't know the details but demonstrating you're a citizen and eligible to vote has to be one of our number one priorities once we get this country turned back onto a lawful path. Without it we might as well negate all laws because those we have will be constitutionally null since the elected are not going to be lawfully elected.

panktainterJun. 17, 1310:02 AM

The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 created the voter fraud we have today. Only legal citizens are allowed to vote by law but the forms allowed for voter registration are easily obtained by non-citizens. The SCOTUS probably has this vote right as a rule of law but doesn't fix the main issue: non-citizens voting because of the flawed NVRA.

sharkysharkJun. 17, 1310:07 AM

Insuring that only legally eligible citizens are registered as voters is fundamental to our future sovereignty. Just whose interests are being served to oppose it?

ericgus55Jun. 17, 1310:37 AM

Voter fraud and voting when ineligible are crimes and should be prosecuted. What these ID laws do, however, is turn away more eligible voters (particularly elderly, young, and poor) than prevent in-eligible voters or fraud. I find it very curious that many who proclaim the dangers of big-brother-style government are in favor of more up-front ID requirements in general.

dogmanJun. 17, 1310:40 AM

"Just whose interests are being served to oppose it?" -- those that don't have access to required documents, those who's required documents don't exist, and those who lack the funds to acquire required documents

genericloginJun. 17, 1310:40 AM

The year is 2013. Would it be so hard to have one form of identification that had all info/endorsements on it? Country of citizenship, drivers license, passport, SSN, right to vote, etc etc. That one form of ID should be scanable, and require fingerprint or eyeball confirmation of identity. As it is now critical information about us is stored in different areas of government and not shared.

holtjanJun. 17, 1310:41 AM

How does the average US citizen prove they are a legal citizen and can lawfully vote? Does everyone need a US issued passport? I do not have a passport, (do not travel outside the US and do not plan to travel outside US) and do not carry a validated birth certificate with me (ID theft - not a good idea to carry this or SSN card). How would I prove I am a citizen?

dewarfJun. 17, 1310:43 AM

I'm certainly happy that Minnesota didn't pass a law requiring voters to show proof of citizenship PRIOR to casting a ballot. Why would any state want to ensure that?

richnpoorJun. 17, 1310:54 AM

What voter fraud? The evidence consistently shows there is little if any fraud. Using the mantra of fraud to defend voter discrimination is itself contradictory to the constitution: it's like presuming guilt. This law deserved to be overturned.

gophypocriteJun. 17, 1310:59 AM

Comments by the uneducated. The Supremacy Clause of the Constitutions states that Federal Law is supreme and that states can't over turn federal law by a state mandate---remember the Civil War?


Comment on this story   |  


Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters